DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims recite a medical support robot device with imaging and estimating a position of a diagnostic site on the subject. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because it provides no improvement to the functioning of the computer device as known in the medical art, thus as noted in MPEP 2106.05(a) the limitations do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer. Similarly, these limitations comprises well-understood, routine and conventional activity with computer devices to receive, evaluate and make “determinations” and “estimations” based on the data. Thus by MPEP 2106.05(d) these steps do not comprises integration of the mental process into practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional element such as an imaging sensor, do are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because imaging sensors are routine and conventional.
Step 1:
Independent claims 1 and 8 recite a method and apparatus, and are thus directed towards statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1:
Claims 1 and 8 recite the following limitations:
generating integrated three-dimensional point cloud information that is a single set of three-dimensional point cloud information on the subject and that indicates a shape of a surface of a part of the subject by using a plurality of sets of the acquired three-dimensional point cloud information and a plurality of sets of the imaging position coordinate information;
determining a position of a specific site on the subject that is predetermined in a plurality of sets of the two-dimensional image information;
estimating a position of a diagnostic site on the subject that is subjected to the medical practice in the single set of integrated three-dimensional point cloud information by using anatomical statistic information and the position of the specific site on the subject.
Additionally, claim 1 recites:
imaging the subject at a plurality of imaging positions to acquire acquired three- dimensional point cloud information that is three-dimensional point cloud information on the subject, two-dimensional image information, and imaging position coordinate information at each of the imaging positions;
These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover concepts that can be practically performed in the human mind, i.e., using pen and paper. With generating, determining and estimating based on values at plurality of points, a human could reasonably evaluate the determinations to identify a “diagnostic site on the subject”. This concept aligns with MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). Mental process where claims reciting: “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)”, were determined to comprise “a mental process when they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions.” Thus, the present claims recite limitations which fall within the 'mental processes’ grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A Prong 2:
Claim 1 does not provide any additional elements.
Claim 8 recites additional elements, such as an imaging sensor and computer device:
The imaging sensor images the subject at a plurality of imaging positions to acquire acquired three- dimensional point cloud information that is three-dimensional point cloud information on the subject, two-dimensional image information, and imaging position coordinate information at each of the imaging positions;
The limitations of using “a plurality of imaging position to acquire acquired three- dimensional point cloud information”, “two-dimensional image information, and imaging position coordinate information at each of the imaging positions” are insignificant extra-solution activity that amounts to mere data gathering and outputting. See Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. V. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (presenting offers and gathering statistics amounted to mere data gathering). Thus, as stated above, the limitations do not comprise integration of the mental process into practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional element noted above (imaging sensor) is conventional and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Additionally, claim 8 recites a “computer device” that:
generates integrated three-dimensional point cloud information that is a single set of three-dimensional point cloud information on the subject and that indicates a shape of a surface of a part of the subject by using a plurality of sets of the acquired three-dimensional point cloud information and a plurality of sets of the imaging position coordinate information,
determines a position of a specific site on the subject that is predetermined in a plurality of sets of the two-dimensional image information, and
estimate a position of a diagnostic site on the subject that is subjected to the medical practice in the single integrated three-dimensional point cloud information by using anatomical statistic information and the position of the specific site on the subject.
The limitation of a “computer device” that “generates”, “determines” and “estimate” are merely implementation of a process on a generic system (i.e. a computer device), such as a conventional computer. The implementation of a mental process on a generic computer provide no improvement to the functioning of a computer system as known in the medical art, thus as noted in MPEP 2106.05(a) the limitations do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer. Similarly, these limitations comprises well-understood, routine and conventional activity with a computer device to generate, determine and make an “estimate” based on the data. Thus by MPEP 2106.05(d) these steps do not comprises integration of the mental process into practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional element noted above (processor) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Thus, as stated above, these steps do not comprises integration of the mental process into practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional element noted above (conventional and well-known computer device) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. There is no recitation of an additional element (or combination of elements) that integrate the abstract idea of a mental process into a practical application. The claimed limitations merely recite routine and conventional components (imaging sensor and computer device) that “estimate a position of a diagnostic site on the subject”. There is no improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a); Or applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2). Thus, the limitations of “imaging positions” by using a generic components (imaging sensor) and a “computer device” that “generates”, “determines” and “estimate” on a generic and conventional “computer device” is considered executing a mental process by using a generic computer device.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional element in the claim are mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in 2B and does not provide an inventive concept.
Dependent claims:
Claims 2-7 and 9-13 are dependent claims that further limit the steps relating to the estimated position of the diagnostic site. Accordingly, these claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application for similar reason to claims 1 and 8. These limitations comprise well-understood, routine and conventional activity in the medical diagnostic and treatment devices, where it is common to have computer devices generate, determine and make estimations based on data, such as collected or acquired data. Thus by MPEP 2106.05(d) these steps do not comprises integration of the mental process into practical application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA M ALTER whose telephone number is (571)272-4939. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David E Hamaoui can be reached at (571) 270-5625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALYSSA M ALTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights